Religious Sentiments as Freedom of Speech and Expression

INTRODUCTION

On 12.04.2021, in the case of Sudheer Rikhari v. the State of Goa, the Goa Bench of Bombay HC said on Friday quashing FIR filed in 2019 against members of an art-rock live performance project “Dastaan LIVE”.  The court said that Police should be sensitive while registering the offense of outraging religious sentiments as freedom of speech and expression is at stake.

A Bench of Justices MS Sonak and MS Jawalkar was hearing pleas seeking quashing of FIR filed against the offense registered under Section 295A[1] of the IPC at the instance of a complaint by one K Venkat Krishna.

The Court held that the complainant specifically chose to pick out sentences or words on the basis of which a vague complaint was filed which did not even spell out the basic ingredients of Section 295A of IPC.

The members were performing live at the Serendipity Arts Festival at Panaji, Goa in 2019. They prepared a set-list of 8 songs which they had been performing in various cities of India unhindered till then. The song against which the complaint came to be filed – Mantra Kavita. “Vaidyanathan Mishra” was the composer of the poem. He stands as a two-time Sahitya Akademi, Award Winner. The petitioners’ contention was that their band was only performing their own musical adaptation of the poem. Even the band members did not modify the lyrics.

The petitioners make a statement that the next day of their performance, some of the band members were called to the Panaji police station. Police demand their apology.

The four persons which included two women pleaded their intention to co-operate with the police. Instead of respecting their co-operation, police placed them under arrest, based on the FIR lodged. Afterward, the police release them on bail. Also, the un-arrested person secured themselves with anticipatory bail.

The petitioners contended that the complaint made did not disclose any offense against them. The court quashed the complaint as it was an abuse of the criminal process.

COURT’S OBSERVATION

The Court said that the allegations in the complaint do not inaccessibly disclose ingredients of Section 295-A of the IPC. Also, there was no clear justification to call some of the members to the police station.

The Court also observed that prosecution of the petitioners in pursuance of such an FIR will amount to an abuse of the process of the court.

Even, the court hopes that police will not act similarly in the future. Hence, does not impose any kind of cost on it. deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings.

Read more latest legal news and blogs @advocatetanwar.com

See Also:

• A person above 18 years of age can choose his/ her religion: Supreme Court
• Statement Made During Enquiry At Pre FIR Stage Neither A Confession Nor A Statement U/S 160 Crpc: Supreme Court